Mumbai: The Maharashtra government on Friday told the Bombay High Court that the police clearance certificate of Fahim Ansari, acquitted in the 26/11 Mumbai terror attack case, was rejected as he remains under surveillance on suspicion of being associated with a banned terror organisation.
Ansari had sought the police clearance certificate to drive an autorickshaw for his livelihood.
Court Questions Denial Despite Acquittal
A bench of Chief Justice Shree Chandrashekhar and Justice Gautam Ankhad asked the state under what law the certificate was denied, given that Ansari had been acquitted of the 26/11 charges.
Public prosecutor Mankhuwar Deshmukh submitted that as per guidelines issued in August 2014, Ansari was not eligible. “There is also a confidential report which states that Ansari is still under watch on suspicion of being a member of a banned terror outfit,” he added.
Rampur Conviction and Other Cases Cited
In its affidavit, the state pointed out that Ansari had been convicted and sentenced to 10 years in the 2008 Rampur CRPF camp grenade attack, which claimed the lives of seven personnel and one civilian.
It further said that although he was acquitted in the 26/11 case, the trial court had observed that he was associated with Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT). Several other criminal cases were also registered against him, the state noted. A sealed confidential report was also submitted to the court.
Hearing Adjourned Due to Absence of Lawyer
As no lawyer appeared for Ansari, the court adjourned the hearing to Saturday.
Background of Acquittal and Conviction
Ansari and Sabauddin Ahmed had been accused of aiding LeT in carrying out the November 26, 2008, Mumbai attacks that killed 166 people. On May 6, 2010, a special court acquitted both for want of evidence — a decision later upheld by the High Court and the Supreme Court. Only lone Pakistani gunman Ajmal Kasab was convicted for the 26/11 carnage.
Also Watch:
Ansari’s Plea Claims Violation of Livelihood Rights
However, Ansari was separately convicted in the Rampur case in Uttar Pradesh and served his 10-year sentence before being released in 2019. Challenging the police refusal, Ansari approached the High Court claiming the decision was “arbitrary, illegal and discriminatory” and violated his fundamental right to livelihood. His plea argued: “The petitioner is legally entitled to engage in gainful employment, free from any legal blemish or barriers.”
To get details on exclusive and budget-friendly property deals in Mumbai & surrounding regions, do visit: https://budgetproperties.in/
